2 days ago
33 ARTICLE AD
A constitutional lawyer and Professor of accounting, Kwaku Asare, also known as Kwaku Azar, has petitioned President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo to remove the Chief Justice (CJ) Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkonoo from office on grounds of incompetence.
In the 19-page petition submitted to Office of the President, the petitioner said the Chief Justice, Justice Torkonoo had made some unpardonable offences which should not go unpunished.
Mr Asare, a Centre for Democratic Development (CDD) fellow and currently domiciled in the United States of America cited misconduct on the part of the CJ as one of the basis he is asking for the removal of the CJ from office.
The private legal practitioner, who is a reformist enumerated a number of cases of incompetence against the CJ, including the transfer of judges sitting on high profile cases, reconstitution of Supreme Court panels to substantiate his case.
Prof. Asare said his petition was grounded in Article 146 of the 1992 Constitution which provides the basis for the removal of the CJ.
The first step in the removal of the CJ from office begins with a petition to a sitting President in accordance with the 1992 Constitution.
After receiving the petition, the President is expected to forward it to the Council of State for advice.
Upon the advice of the Council of State, a committee made of two Supreme Court judges and others are set up by the President to investigative and determine whether there is a prima facie case against the CJ.
If the committees establish a prima facie case against the CJ, the President, acting on the findings of the committee would go ahead and dismiss the CJ from office.
Prof. Asare clarified that his petition does not challenge any judicial decisions or rulings made by Chief Justice Torkornoo in her capacity as a Supreme Court judge.
“Accordingly, the petition does not challenge any decisions, orders, or directives issued by the Chief Justice in the performance of her duties as a justice of the Supreme Court, including those made to enforce judgments, decrees, or orders in cases she has adjudicated,” he stated.
The petitioner alleged that the Chief Justice’s administrative actions undermine constitutional principles, particularly in judicial appointments.
He claimed that she had established “an elaborate scheme of requesting the President to appoint specific judges and later presenting the names for the Judicial Council’s approval,” which, he argued, “subverts the constitutional scheme and converts both the council and President into rubber-stamping her preferred judges.”
Prof. Asare thus, called for a thorough investigation into his claims, adding:
“When the petition is being considered at any stage, members of the Judicial Council will be subpoenaed to testify on the matter.”
BY MALIK SULLEMANA
